So, March of the Eagles. I picked it up last night and spent a couple of hours on it today. I'm not really sure what to think. It is sort of like Hearts of Iron 3 but without most of the non-war stuff. No production really, except for army and naval units. Diplomacy is pretty simplistic, kind of like EU3 or Vicky 2: you only get so many diplomats who recharge over time. Tech is simplified as well: you get "Idea Points" that charge over time or come through battles in the game. You cash in the Idea Points for new ideas. The ideas are mostly limited to how to make you fight better.

The biggest change is the level of detail in the armies. Each army has left and right flanks, a center and a reserve. Each of these can be assigned to a general, who has stats and who can gain traits as he fights battles that affect his stats. Each flank and the center can have a suggested tactic ("Delay", "Up the Guards!", "Hold", etc.) but the flank commander can override this depending on how things go in the battle. And, the tactics do seem to matter.

Attrition matters as well. Nothing worse than watching your spiffy new army melting away in the mountains of Persia.

Army composition matters too. Some tactics are not available unless a flank has a certain unit makeup. I guess this is where I start to wonder about this game: do I want to micro-manage all of my armies? Because the armies at the start of the game are usually a mishmash of units that seem almost nonsensical. But it seems like you should to get the most out of the men you have.

Army management seems to be a bit much as well. The map is huge: it seems twice as big as CK2's, given that they cover the same area. Just finding and remembering where everything is seems like work to me.

I guess another thing that seems odd is that you can win this game (well if playing as a Great Power), a bit of a departure for a Paradox game. Your country has strategic points, both land and sea-related), you have to hold to gain "supremacy". Get enough supremacy for both and you win. Barring that, who ever has the most supremacy when 1820 rolls around wins. Not a bad mechanic, it just feels so weird trying to win a Paradox game. This is not helping me feel good about this game for some reason.

Anyway, sorry to be so randomly rambling; I am mostly talking to myself here trying to suss out how I feel about MotE. I did have fun in my time with it. But I was fighting a limited war with a vastly overmatched Persia, so it is difficult to tell if that colored my judgment.

I'm kind of in awe about any strategic game that seems to flummox you, TBoon. I'm not sure us mere strategy-mortals could comprehend it... I'm still working on grokking AJE.

It seems to me though that what you describe the natural side effect of any game handling Napoleonic strategy and warfare. The campaigns were not simple, they were run by freaking genius commanders. And it's hard to naturally do more than try to copy their strategies. I suspect it will be easier once you get the scale and the tempo of the game down.

There's no materials safety sheet for astatine. If there were, it would just be the word "NO", scrawled over and over again in charred blood. - Randall Munroe

I'm kind of in awe about any strategic game that seems to flummox you, TBoon. I'm not sure us mere strategy-mortals could comprehend it... I'm still working on grokking AJE.

It seems to me though that what you describe the natural side effect of any game handling Napoleonic strategy and warfare. The campaigns were not simple, they were run by freaking genius commanders. And it's hard to naturally do more than try to copy their strategies. I suspect it will be easier once you get the scale and the tempo of the game down.

It's a pretty awe-inspiring game, at least so far. Maybe part of my discommodation is that it is like, yet unlike, other Paradox games. Kind of throws one off, you know? But, there certainly is a lot of stuff going on, never a dull moment.

I miss tiny dudes in gaudy uniforms battling it out; that's about the only thing missing.

You know, I kind of assumed this was one of the AGEOD system games, but it really does look like a variant of the Clausewitz engine. I'm in. :-)

Yeah, it's a Clausewitz game, sorry I did not make that clear. I think that's what makes seem so odd. There are touches of AGEOD flavor in there, if you know what I mean. Unit portraits for instance, although not a crazy in that regard as an AGEOD game would be. I think before AGEOD and Paradox parted company, AGEOD had started a Napoleonics game. When they left, I think the Paradox team started work on MotE.

I've had a few games, its obviously a dream come true for me, but I must say it is brutal. Two unlucky draws and the Zulus are in the compound and its a defeat. The board game has slightly more forgiving track inside the drift, this adaptation seems to be simpler & therefore less forgiving. Unless it's just that I haven't managed to build the mealie box barricades yet!

The main gripe I have is that there are some overly long loading times, between starting the game, ending the game (for a defeat screen usually). Plus there's a quick black loading screen between combat, rolls for fire starting, or fire extinguishing etc.

I can see me playing it a lot, its nicely themed.

The combat dice rolls are done with fruit machine spinners, and you can do them individually or all at once.

Although luck is a big part of the token draw, knowing the ins and outs of the hero cards is where you exert your control on proceedings. The battle spinners will just add more tension .

Anyway, I'm still glowing over the fact my fave states of siege game has been made.

March of the Eagles on this weeks' Three Moves Ahead. Nice discussion (so far, I'm only ~25 minutes in) but mainly focused on multiplayer - Rob and the other two gentlemen on the panel are playing what seems like a huge MP campaign with Troy and other strategy writer types.

March of the Eagles on this weeks' Three Moves Ahead. Nice discussion (so far, I'm only ~25 minutes in) but mainly focused on multiplayer - Rob and the other two gentlemen on the panel are playing what seems like a huge MP campaign with Troy and other strategy writer types.

Listening to them pull off a big multiplayer game like that is making me super jealous.

<+Vector_> I was imitating you, like a parrot imitating a dumber parrot

I said it was starting to make sense, not that the tutorial was useful. It shows you ten minutes worth of stuff, then says "It's time to invade The Netherlands. Gather your troops, load them on ships, move the ships to the Netherlands coast, and take over the country. The tutorial will not progress until you win." Naturally, you're left on your own to figure out the hows, wheres, whens and whats. If you've played a Paradox grand strategy game, you'll be fine. If not, you'll be lost.

For me, I was okay.

There's no materials safety sheet for astatine. If there were, it would just be the word "NO", scrawled over and over again in charred blood. - Randall Munroe

March of the Eagles has kind of eaten my brain this weekend. Once I finally figured out what seems to be a decent army make-up, the game started clicking for me. It is interesting that one of my least favorite parts about EU3, the moving of armies around and making sure the right army is in the right place at the right time, is pretty fun in this. It helps that the game has multiple rally points (both ground and naval) and when you build brigades/squadrons, it shows which rally point will be used, so making new armies and fleets is pretty easy.

My current game (I'm Russia):

GB got its tail kicked in and seems to be out of the general scrum for now. Not shown is my having eaten 2/3rds of Persia, and I had just started my liberation of the northern Ottoman Empire when I took this. Also barely shown is Sweden getting kicked in the face by the Danes (Denmark has taken a lot more Sweden above the northern edge of this SS.

After I beat up the Ottomans one more time, I am either going after Sweden (they have 4 of my dominance provinces) or the Prussians (they have 3).

Didn't slitherine do a bunch of ancient era miniature wargames? Sounds like a good match to me, but for some reason I don't think GW is going to digitize their tabletop game. Seems a bit cannibalistic.

<+Vector_> I was imitating you, like a parrot imitating a dumber parrot

Didn't slitherine do a bunch of ancient era miniature wargames? Sounds like a good match to me, but for some reason I don't think GW is going to digitize their tabletop game. Seems a bit cannibalistic.

Don't tell me your filthy, filthy lies!

They mentioned multiple platforms in the press release, so that means ... vidja gamz?

Didn't slitherine do a bunch of ancient era miniature wargames? Sounds like a good match to me, but for some reason I don't think GW is going to digitize their tabletop game. Seems a bit cannibalistic.

Don't tell me your filthy, filthy lies!

They mentioned multiple platforms in the press release, so that means ... vidja gamz?

Initial release is PC and iOS according to some follow on reporting. If they can put it on iOS they can do Xbox Arcade and that could do wonders for Slitherine's bottom line. Love their games and if I don't get into the beta of their Alpha Centauri like sci-fi game they are working I may cry manly tears on manliness.